Teams

Pearce/Murfreesboro

2026 Combo 55 & Over-Monday Evening-Murfreesboro · 7.5 Combo 55 & Over - Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule2 upcoming · 4 played
Sep 14 6:30 PM
Old Fort Park
Sep 21 6:30 PM
Old Fort Park
2026-09-01vs Blankenship/MurfreesboroLost 12
L#1 DoublesJan Phanthalangsy / Leanna Wright vs Wendy Rogers / Sally Wrather3-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesCindy Chaffin / Suzanne Eubank vs Angela Blankenship / Tammy Shrivalle6-2, 6-0
L#3 DoublesLiz Daney / Janet Prentice vs Darci Bloss / Jennifer Kelley3-6, 4-6
2026-08-25vs Blankenship/MurfreesboroWon 21
W#1 DoublesCindy Chaffin / Suzanne Eubank vs Ronda Hawkins / Cindy Mccullough7-5, 1-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesTricia Davis / Midori Egawa vs Sonja Plumlee / Brenda Monajjem4-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJan Phanthalangsy / Patricia Eudaley vs Marian Vangeli / Jennifer Kelley2-6, 5-7
2026-08-19vs Blankenship/MurfreesboroLost 12
L#1 DoublesMidori Egawa / Molly Adcock vs Jennifer Kelley / Pamela Hicks6-2, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMelanie Shipp / Leanna Wright vs Brenda Monajjem / Marian Vangeli4-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesJan Phanthalangsy / Patricia Eudaley vs Angela Blankenship / Darci Bloss6-3, 6-3
2026-08-10vs Blankenship/MurfreesboroWon 30
W#1 DoublesJan Phanthalangsy / Cindy Chaffin vs Jennifer Kelley / Wendy Rogers3-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#2 DoublesSuzanne Eubank / Shannon Fox vs Brenda Monajjem / Tammy Shrivalle6-3, 6-2
W#3 DoublesJanet Prentice / Connie Pearce vs Angela Blankenship / Sonja Plumlee7-5, 7-5
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.

Flight standings for 7.5 Combo 55 & Over - Women have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

Roster averages 3.41 estimated across 12 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

3.61
Suzanne Eubank
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.58
Janet Prentice
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.55
Midori Egawa
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.55
Jan Phanthalangsy
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.46
Melanie Shipp
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.46
Shannon Fox
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.40
Tricia Davis
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.34
Cindy Chaffin
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.33
Molly Adcock
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.32
Connie Pearce
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.19
Liz Daney
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.10
Leanna Wright
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Patricia Eudaley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

Melanie Shipp + Suzanne Eubank0526% gamesnot enough data
Connie Pearce + Shannon Fox224 matchesnot enough data
Shannon Fox + Jan Phanthalangsy224 matchesnot enough data
Midori Egawa + Tricia Davis303 matchesnot enough data
Suzanne Eubank + Cindy Chaffin213 matchesnot enough data
Jan Phanthalangsy + Cindy Chaffin123 matchesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

Suzanne Eubank
15W–16L career · 3 lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.61
Janet Prentice
3W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
28%72%<1%
3.58
Midori Egawa
6W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
36%64%<1%
3.55
Jan Phanthalangsy
17W–28L career · 4 lines in 2026
37%63%<1%
3.55
Melanie Shipp
2W–9L career · 1 line in 2026
61%39%<1%
3.46
Shannon Fox
37W–19L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%61%38%
3.46
Tricia Davis
16W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Cindy Chaffin
27W–23L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%86%13%
3.34
Molly Adcock
4W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Connie Pearce
7W–17L career · 1 line in 2026
1%89%10%
3.32
Liz Daney
32W–19L career · 1 line in 2026
9%90%1%
3.19
Leanna Wright
5W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.10
Patricia Eudaley
5W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.